Guide to Aerial, Ground and Naval Warfare

[Concordeia]

Also, regarding your numbers, the Army typically takes up at least twice as many personnel as the Navy or Air Force. Just check out the numbers for the US Armed Services on Wikipedia and you'll see what I mean.

[Vortiaganica]

My suggestion for non-lethal weaponry as part of general warfare is to have plenty of flashbang and chemical incapacitant (knock-out gas) weapons, though the mass use of flashbang munitions could very possibly cause permanent hearing loss. For stopping vehicles, I would recommend high-power microwave beam weapons, seeing as almost all modern vehicles have electronic systems, though they may be shielded. In some situations, if the enemy force is really competent and intent on killing your guys or others, you may have no choice but to resort to lethal measures.

Hmm...

Interesting.

I'm thinking to use fireteams as the basis for my tactics. (Search on the Wikipedia, it's got a fair bit of information)

But instead of 4 units using lethal weaponry, I'm thinking of adding a fifth non-lethal + medic support gunner, armed with first aid and non-lethal weaponry, as well as issuing a couple of non-lethal weapons (like flashbangs and incaps) to all men.

Also, designing a microwave beam mounted on an APC base or something on NSD.

Note: Vortiaganica is an island nation - the police forces are literally an extension of the army, or more appropriately, the other way around. But I do see what you mean. I probably should change that.

[Mikoyan-Guryevich]

Rubber bullets aren't meant to be lethal either, but one shot to the temple and you're gone. I would class Mustard gas as a non-lethal weapon because it isn't employed to kill, but to harrass and incapacitate enemy soldiers.

Good sir, Mustard Gas was designed to slaughter enemy soldiers, not harrass and incapaciatate them. It was designed to clear trenches and kill everything in them including the rats. So I disagree on that note. Do not misinform.

Regardless of what it was designed for, mustard gas was found to be lethal in less than 1% of cases in World War I. It was proved to be far more effective as an incapacitating agent, which is what it should be used for.

[DaWoad]

Good sir, Mustard Gas was designed to slaughter enemy soldiers, not harrass and incapaciatate them. It was designed to clear trenches and kill everything in them including the rats. So I disagree on that note. Do not misinform.

Regardless of what it was designed for, mustard gas was found to be lethal in less than 1% of cases in World War I. It was proved to be far more effective as an incapacitating agent, which is what it should be used for.

it's a chlorine/phosgene mixture. I don't know where you pulled that 1% from but that's bull.

[Mikedor]

Good sir, Mustard Gas was designed to slaughter enemy soldiers, not harrass and incapaciatate them. It was designed to clear trenches and kill everything in them including the rats. So I disagree on that note. Do not misinform.

Regardless of what it was designed for, mustard gas was found to be lethal in less than 1% of cases in World War I. It was proved to be far more effective as an incapacitating agent, which is what it should be used for.

Even if it didn't kill, it permanently blinded and damaged the lungs of thousands. Hardly the same as tear gas.

[Amerikians]

Good sir, Mustard Gas was designed to slaughter enemy soldiers, not harrass and incapaciatate them. It was designed to clear trenches and kill everything in them including the rats. So I disagree on that note. Do not misinform.

Regardless of what it was designed for, mustard gas was found to be lethal in less than 1% of cases in World War I. It was proved to be far more effective as an incapacitating agent, which is what it should be used for.

No. Just No. It is one of the most lethal chemical weapons ever divised and it should never be used as an incapacitating agent ever. Even if you don't die you're permenantly FUBAR from it even if you're at the edges of the cloud. Using it like tear gas would decimate entire populations and is pure stupidity.

[Vortiaganica]

I've revised my troop numbers, bringing airforce and navy down from 30 mil to 20 mil, and added personnel to the army/logistics, Paramilitary, secret police and police.

[Mikoyan-Guryevich]

Regardless of what it was designed for, mustard gas was found to be lethal in less than 1% of cases in World War I. It was proved to be far more effective as an incapacitating agent, which is what it should be used for.

it's a chlorine/phosgene mixture. I don't know where you pulled that 1% from but that's bull.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_mustard

Mustard gas can certainly be lethal in high doses. However, trenches are in the open air so the gas would not be overly effective. If the troops were in a sealed gas chamber, yes they would be dead.

Even if it didn't kill, it permanently blinded and damaged the lungs of thousands. Hardly the same as tear gas.

No. Just No. It is one of the most lethal chemical weapons ever divised and it should never be used as an incapacitating agent ever. Even if you don't die you're permenantly FUBAR from it even if you're at the edges of the cloud. Using it like tear gas would decimate entire populations and is pure stupidity.

Whoever said it would be like tear gas?

And if it should never be employed as an incapacitating agent, why did the German Army use it as one in the First World War? Mustard gas is not an effective killing agent, however it is very useful to render soldiers effectively useless. You fire the gas into the enemy positions, basically incapacitating them all, then you do whatever else you want.

If you want to use mustard gas as a killing agent, go for it. But when the troops grab their gas masks and bolt from the compound, don't whine and say they should be dead. Mustard gas isn't an instant kill.

[DaWoad]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_mustard

Mustard gas can certainly be lethal in high doses. However, trenches are in the open air so the gas would not be overly effective. If the troops were in a sealed gas chamber, yes they would be dead.

trenches are below ground level. Mustard gas is heavier than air and therefore accumulates in below ground level areas. Mustard gas also lingers so, you might as well be in a gas chamber if you are in a trench.

Edit:I was wrong about the mixture though ... Wonder what gas I was thinking of :/

[Concordeia]

it's a chlorine/phosgene mixture. I don't know where you pulled that 1% from but that's bull.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_mustard

Mustard gas can certainly be lethal in high doses. However, trenches are in the open air so the gas would not be overly effective. If the troops were in a sealed gas chamber, yes they would be dead.

Even if it didn't kill, it permanently blinded and damaged the lungs of thousands. Hardly the same as tear gas.

No. Just No. It is one of the most lethal chemical weapons ever divised and it should never be used as an incapacitating agent ever. Even if you don't die you're permenantly FUBAR from it even if you're at the edges of the cloud. Using it like tear gas would decimate entire populations and is pure stupidity.

Whoever said it would be like tear gas?

And if it should never be employed as an incapacitating agent, why did the German Army use it as one in the First World War? Mustard gas is not an effective killing agent, however it is very useful to render soldiers effectively useless. You fire the gas into the enemy positions, basically incapacitating them all, then you do whatever else you want.

If you want to use mustard gas as a killing agent, go for it. But when the troops grab their gas masks and bolt from the compound, don't whine and say they should be dead. Mustard gas isn't an instant kill.

It could be that the Germans wanted to use an incapacitating agent but didn't care if said agent caused death/permanent injury or not. I doubt that the wellbeing of enemy troops was a major concern during WWI. If you want to use a purely non-lethal incapacitating agent, something along the lines of Agent 15 or DMHP should do the trick.

[United States of PA]

And if it should never be employed as an incapacitating agent, why did the German Army use it as one in the First World War? Mustard gas is not an effective killing agent, however it is very useful to render soldiers effectively useless. You fire the gas into the enemy positions, basically incapacitating them all, then you do whatever else you want.

It was the only gas of its type in existence at the major times of its use. By the end of the war it had been far surpassed by more effective gases.

[Vortiaganica]

Is ten million a good troop number for a population of 2.5 billion?

[DaWoad]

And if it should never be employed as an incapacitating agent, why did the German Army use it as one in the First World War? Mustard gas is not an effective killing agent, however it is very useful to render soldiers effectively useless. You fire the gas into the enemy positions, basically incapacitating them all, then you do whatever else you want.

It was the only gas of its type in existence at the major times of its use. By the end of the war it had been far surpassed by more effective gases.

That and it's useless in that all it requires is really a gas mask and some heavy clothing.

[United States of PA]

It was the only gas of its type in existence at the major times of its use. By the end of the war it had been far surpassed by more effective gases.

That and it's useless in that all it requires is really a gas mask and some heavy clothing.

Hence that it was first.

Im not trying to argue that it was good at what it was meant to do. Im saying that it sucked because it was the first Gas to be made for warfare, and actually used as such.

[DaWoad]

That and it's useless in that all it requires is really a gas mask and some heavy clothing.

Hence that it was first.

Im not trying to argue that it was good at what it was meant to do. Im saying that it sucked because it was the first Gas to be made for warfare, and actually used as such.

yah agreed it's just not very/at all useful against modern militaries

[United States of PA]

For Modern Warfare, VX Gas is the way to go.

That stuff is friggin Nasty, i mean Nasty. I've heard it will melt your own skin off and kill you within 30 seconds. A small rocket turned into Aerosol fired into San Francisco on a good day can probably kill 70,000 people, and that is a smallass rocket.

[Concordeia]

For Modern Warfare, VX Gas is the way to go.

That stuff is friggin Nasty, i mean Nasty. I've heard it will melt your own skin off and kill you within 30 seconds. A small rocket turned into Aerosol fired into San Francisco on a good day can probably kill 70,000 people, and that is a smallass rocket.

First, VX doesn't melt your skin, it causes your nervous system to fail, hence why it is called a "nerve agent". Second, most nations (as far as I'm aware) will not utilize such chemical weapons like that. Not unless they want severe retaliation against them.

[United States of PA]

First, note i said "I've heard".

Second, obviously i am not in the "Most nations" category. I will use VX Gas on a Civvie population if forced too. No joke. The situation would have to be Stalingrad bad to do it, but i would.

[Concordeia]

First, note i said "I've heard".

Second, obviously i am not in the "Most nations" category. I will use VX Gas on a Civvie population if forced too. No joke. The situation would have to be Stalingrad bad to do it, but i would.

What situation could possibly necessitate the use of extremely lethal nerve gas on a civilian population? If you say a rebellion, then obviously you're doing something wrong policy-wise. This isn't meant to insult you, but it just doesn't make sense to kill so many civilians like that.

EDIT: If it's Stalingrad bad and enemy forces have already infiltrated the cities, it kind of makes it pointless to frag your own populace along with the enemy. I would recommend surrendering at that point.

[Vortiaganica]

EDIT: If it's Stalingrad bad and enemy forces have already infiltrated the cities, it kind of makes it pointless to frag your own populace along with the enemy. I would recommend surrendering at that point.

Unless it's a city that is key to some massive offensive action by your opponent, with very few civilians in it (say, after a successful evacuation), that is the last step in reaching some massive stronghold for yourself and possibly some more pacifist allies,

I'd have to agree with Mr. Pessimist here.

[Concordeia]

EDIT: If it's Stalingrad bad and enemy forces have already infiltrated the cities, it kind of makes it pointless to frag your own populace along with the enemy. I would recommend surrendering at that point.

Unless it's a city that is key to some massive offensive action by your opponent, with very few civilians in it (say, after a successful evacuation), that is the last step in reaching some massive stronghold for yourself and possibly some more pacifist allies,

I'd have to agree with Mr. Pessimist here.

Not pessimist, pragmatic optimist. Big difference.

[Axis Nova]

First, note i said "I've heard".

Second, obviously i am not in the "Most nations" category. I will use VX Gas on a Civvie population if forced too. No joke. The situation would have to be Stalingrad bad to do it, but i would.

What situation could possibly necessitate the use of extremely lethal nerve gas on a civilian population? If you say a rebellion, then obviously you're doing something wrong policy-wise. This isn't meant to insult you, but it just doesn't make sense to kill so many civilians like that.

EDIT: If it's Stalingrad bad and enemy forces have already infiltrated the cities, it kind of makes it pointless to frag your own populace along with the enemy. I would recommend surrendering at that point.

Keep in mind that some people around here are addicted to gratituous excessive violence. Whether that's a good or a bad thing depends on your point of view, I suppose.

[United States of PA]

Keep in mind that some people around here are addicted to gratituous excessive violence. Whether that's a good or a bad thing depends on your point of view, I suppose.

Im only addicted to that when someone has done something to really make my nation ICly pissed off, or i am in a position, so bad, i cannot even fathom the situation.

That, and having a very Hammerabi Code style Military Doctrine helps the matter. You Chlorine Gas me, I VX Gas a similar target of yours.

[Idaho Conservatives]

Is anyone forgetting how difficult gas weapons are to contain? If the wind and/or weather changes even slightly, major shit will be hitting the fan.

[Vortiaganica]

The thing is, in NS,

Most of us have long-range missiles or rockets or bombs or whatever that can be used to deploy such chemical weapons.